50 replies to this topic

[tipotep]

freetoroam, on 22 January 2013 - 08:22 PM, said:

The problem today is those who keep popping out children after children know that in countries like England, they can because the tax payer will pay for them.
I remember as a child (oh yes) when i was in primary school collecting monies for Africas starving children,,after all these years they are still breeding like rabbits, makes me wonder why they never taught these people about contraception from day one, no doubt their religion will not allow it, but they are happy enough to allow people to give them food, clothes and guns.

We have the same problem here in AUS but the Government has a payment that is called the " Baby Bonus " - all new mothers receive it and I think from memory it was around about $1000 per child .

I can recall a show on TV a while ago and they were looking into the baby bonus and especially young mothers with multiple kids and how they were using the money .

Most of the young ones were buying flat screen TV’s and Xbox’s & stuff rather than spend it on a pram or a cribs etc . I can recall one mother in particular that had 6 kids in the last 6 years and she basically said she has them for the bonus ( all 6 kids had  different fathers    )
I can understand why the government have the bonus , for young families getting started it's a big help  , I guess they could put a cap of two kids and this might deter some people from abusing the system and popping out kids all over the place

PS - I have to agree that our planet has a population limit , have we reached it ? Maybe , maybe not , the problem as I see it , when we do work out that the planet is over crowded it will be too late and then what ?

TiP.

Edited by tipotep, 23 January 2013 - 03:46 AM.

[redhen]

Hilander, on 23 January 2013 - 01:24 AM, said:

I'm sorry but I think this planet is at its limits on population.  There may be physical space for them but not enough prime farm land or clean water to take care of them.

You're in good company. Many people have been saying this, the Union of Concerned Scientists among them; which includes "Some 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including the majority of Nobel laureates in the sciences"

http://www.ucsusa.or...scientists.html

"The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite. Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite. And we are fast approaching many of the earth's limits. Current economic practices which damage the environment, in both developed and underdeveloped nations, cannot be continued without the risk that vital global systems will be damaged beyond repair."

[AsteroidX]

people are destructive towards nature. So it would be reasonable the larger the population the worse off our world is from an environmental point of view.

In the past several centuries wars have decimated generations of people through horrible wars. We have not done this as species for 70 years now so we are seeing the effects of overpopulation.
So we have a couple choices. Use the same barbaric practices of the past to control population.

Or change how we think and live and live for a greater purpose which is preserving this planet. Our only home.

[Professor T]

Hilander, on 23 January 2013 - 01:24 AM, said:

I'm sorry but I think this planet is at its limits on population.  There may be physical space for them but not enough prime farm land or clean water to take care of them.

Sweet as. Dont be sorry.. Your mind is not mine to change..

There are of course limits to population.. I just don't believe we are anywhere near those physical limits..

[Br Cornelius]

Professor T, on 23 January 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

Sweet as. Dont be sorry.. Your mind is not mine to change..

There are of course limits to population.. I just don't believe we are anywhere near those physical limits..

There are good reasons for saying that at the current population, with the current lifestyle and technology, we are at twice that limit. We currently have billions living in poverty (real, not relative).
Technology has no magic bullets to pull out of the hat to change that situation in the next 40yrs, by which time the earth will be in a very bad way. GMO will not save the aquifers or the soil from depletion. The only option is to change our lifestyle to a none consumptive one. What are you prepared to give up to make society sustainable ? I suspect the answer for most people is - nothing.

Br Cornelius

[Little Fish]

freetoroam, on 22 January 2013 - 06:53 PM, said:

This backs up my thread about the booming births in England. Its not rocket science to see what the future holds if nothing is done. But we have a lot of selfish people in the world who think its their right to breed as much as they like, they do not even want to think of the effect it will have on anything else, planet or tax payers, and they do not even care.

the birth rate in england is below replacement levels (replacement level = 2.1 children per woman). the population will decline to zero without immigration.
what made you think otherwise?

[freetoroam]

Little Fish, on 23 January 2013 - 10:08 AM, said:

the birth rate in england is below replacement levels (replacement level = 2.1 children per woman). the population will decline to zero without immigration.
what made you think otherwise?

Did you not see my thread about the birth rates in England? How can the birth rate return to zero without immigration? unless every British person becomes sterile over night!  ................  Have I read your post right, cos I can`t believe you are saying the population will decline to zero without immigration?


PS:  We spell England with a capital E.

[Br Cornelius]

freetoroam, on 23 January 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

Did you not see my thread about the birth rates in England? How can the birth rate return to zero without immigration? unless every British person becomes sterile over night!  ................  Have I read your post right, cos I can`t believe you are saying the population will decline to zero without immigration?


PS:  We spell England with a capital E.

it is true to say that at the current birth rate, and no net immigration, the English population would theoretically decline to nothing over many hundreds of years. That scenario is not going to happen because like all things, in the long run population dynamics responds to stimulus from outside and adjusts.
This is what is happening on a global scale at the moment with population predicted to level out at 10billion by 2050 and decline thereafter.
However it took just 40years for the population to rise from 3billion to its current 7billion and destroy most of the environmental supports we currently depend on, so adding half as many people again and waiting another 40years to see the consequences will inevitably cause disasterous collapse of the ecosystem.

Br Cornelius

[freetoroam]

Br Cornelius, on 23 January 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

it is true to say that at the current birth rate, and no net immigration, the English population would theoretically decline to nothing over many hundreds of years. That scenario is not going to happen because like all things, in the long run population dynamics responds to stimulus from outside and adjusts.
This is what is happening on a global scale at the moment with population predicted to level out at 10billion by 2050 and decline thereafter.
However it took just 40years for the population to rise from 3billion to its current 7billion and destroy most of the environmental supports we currently depend on, so adding half as many people again and waiting another 40years to see the consequences will inevitably cause disasterous collapse of the ecosystem.

Br Cornelius

I am not sure how anyone can work out what the population will be in a few hundred years time and who will be contributing to it. Funny how the stat makers did not predict what is happening today.
I do agree though that the population in England will not grow without some form of immigrant input, but throughout history that has happened. Today we are looking at something new, new races! The interaction between Asians, Africans and Europeans no doubt is far higher than it has ever been before, so what the future holds is difficult to tell, but it does not mean that the whole of the English people will be wiped out.
There are not that many English who have not got some European blood in their veins, but as for Asian and African...thats a different story.....I am not talking about immigrants from Europe, thats nothing new here.

[greypaperman]

Humanity has to take some responsibilty for itself and stop the proliferation of the species in its tracks and this should be done by forcefully sterilising large sections of the populations who shouldn't be breeding anyway.

There is only so long the natural world can support the burden of the human race.

[Purifier]

greypaperman, on 23 January 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

Humanity has to take some responsibilty for itself and stop the proliferation of the species in its tracks and this should be done by forcefully sterilising large sections of the populations who shouldn't be breeding anyway.

There is only so long the natural world can support the burden of the human race.

Damned if you are not right, sir. My first proposal is castration, the ultimate practice of sterlisation. Also, the females across this planet will not haft to worry about late night headaches, will be doing them a favour as well. Therefore, my second proposal is we start with you. You can show us how much you believe and support in our cause, that humans are a plague upon the earth and lead by example. What say you?!

[onereaderone]

this  is  all  quite  retro .   they  were  worried  that  the  human  race  would  disappear   off  the  face  of  the  earth  befor  the  1900's    over  populate  in  the  1930's    ...   what  point  of  veiw   fails  to  see  is  the   weapons   the  future  holds   out  ...
one  out  of  controll  bio wep   will  solve   all  these  over  population  issues ...   what  we  really  need  to  work  on  is  fresh  water  systems   and   electrical   power  grids .

the  easy  answers  to  over population  are  that   poor  people  die   very  easily   when   things  go  wrong  ...   just  relax...   nature  is  no  where  near  as  fragile  as  you  might  think ,  and  you  are  no  where  near  as  tough  and  bullet  proof  as  you  might  think....

history   is  a better  teacher  than  political   talking  points   and   global  warming   predictions  that   absolutly  will  happen    by  the   year  2000 !  every  one   knows  that   these  predictions  have  been  flawless  ,  we  must   tax  the  air   or  life  will  end....

and  killing  6  million  jews   must  have seemed  like  a good  idea  at  the  time  to  save  the planet ... lets  just  calm  down ,  and  look  at  what  the  data  says ...

something  that  was  known  in  the  1930's  was   the  relationship  between   weather  and  crops...
when  you grow  alot  of  cropps ,  you raise  the  oxygen  levels  and  lower  the  carbondioxide  ,   you  have  more  fires and  things  heat  up   and  you  have  more  wars ...

if   you  harvest  everything  and  do  not  plant  ,   stop  planting  crops ...
  you  lower  the  oxygen and  raise  the  carbon dioxide...  plants  grow better ,  but   things  get  cooler ,  and  sleepy

did  i  point  out...    if  you have  more   feilds  of  planted  grass's ,  corn  ,  rice  and  food  production...   the  crops  pull  the  carbondioxide  out  of  the  air...   lowering   it....  and  raising  the   oxygen  ...    heating  the  world  up...   like  global  warming.
making   climat  change ...    from  planting  stuff .   of course  thats  what  the  obvious  record   shows  if  your  not  pushing  a political  point  of  veiw  that  has  nothing  to  do  with  what  is  really happening....

the  same  is  true  with population .  people  are  not  dieing ,  thats  a good  thing .   i  understand  its  hard  to  grasp ,  but  death  is  not  a good  thing ..   it  still  happens  among  the  stupid  people  who  hate  all  that   western  technology ...   if  the  political  types  just  get  out  of  the  way...   i  suspect  that  the  stupid  people  will  get  wealthy...  and  stop  having  kids  just  like  the  englanders  and  other   rich   people  of  the  earth ...   having  a large  familys   is  expensive  ,  and  takes  alot  of  time  away  from  living ...    just  relax  ,  i  suspect  everything  will  work  out .

[Professor T]

Br Cornelius, on 23 January 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

There are good reasons for saying that at the current population, with the current lifestyle and technology, we are at twice that limit. We currently have billions living in poverty (real, not relative).
Technology has no magic bullets to pull out of the hat to change that situation in the next 40yrs, by which time the earth will be in a very bad way. GMO will not save the aquifers or the soil from depletion. The only option is to change our lifestyle to a none consumptive one. What are you prepared to give up to make society sustainable ? I suspect the answer for most people is - nothing.

Br Cornelius

The only thing anyone has to give up imo is our nature distructive practices.. Fracking, Nuclear energy, and our insane social & economic systems that support this.. It is foolish that humanity works against nature and nieve to think we are apart from it..

[Little Fish]

freetoroam, on 23 January 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

Did you not see my thread about the birth rates in England?

nope, did it start with a daily mail article perchance?

Quote

How can the birth rate return to zero without immigration?

the population will decline to zero at the current birth rates. to stand still a population (western/modern) needs a fertility rate of 2.1, which means every woman during her lifetime gives birth to 2.1 children (average).
england has a fertility rate of 1.8 last I looked it up, so its in decline with most of the other western and asian countries. It is only mainly african countries that have fertility rates of 5-8 because of abject poverty, because survival there requires large families.

Quote

unless every British person becomes sterile over night!  ................  Have I read your post right, cos I can`t believe you are saying the population will decline to zero without immigration?

yep it will, unless the birth rate increases to 2.1 per woman.

...and ehrlich is a foolish quack and self hating eugenicist who sycophantically sucks up to pretentious psychopathic self styled elites.

Edited by Little Fish, 23 January 2013 - 07:41 PM.

[freetoroam]

Little Fish, on 23 January 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:

england


so its in decline with most of the other western and asian countries. It is only mainly african countries that have fertility rates of 5-8 because of abject poverty, because survival there requires large families.

In England, the Asians (Indians) are having more than 2 children and the Africans are still breeding like they did in Africa, there is no need for them to keep doing this.
I do agree that at the rate it is now, the white man will dwindle to become the minority if something is not done soon, but we can not tell what will happen in a few hundred years time, those who come up with those sort of stats did not even foresee what would happen today, no one knew it would be like this.
When people started giving money to African countries to help the starving years back, who would have known then that we would still be doing it today and they would still be breeding so much? We just can not tell what the future holds, what concerns me more is not the immigrant growth as such, it is how people will live side by side without this country becoming another Syria or Egypt in years to come.